Dear Editor,
It is indisputable that the challenger Mitt Romney won Wednesday’s US presidential debate with President Obama, but it will not necessarily change the outcome of the presidential race in which Obama was leading in all of the opinion polls. However, it will restore Republican confidence in their candidate and cause people to take a second look at Romney, who two days ago was heading for a resounding defeat. One did not need a poll or political pundits to point out that Romney won hands down; even Democrats conceded the debate defeat. It was a clear Romney victory and not even close – something Obama handlers were worried about before the debate.
Obama failed to use the debate to seal the deal, and what we have now is a longer fight to put away Romney, even giving him a chance to pull off the presidency.
The President allowed Romney to smack him around on all the issues and he did not offer an effective response to any of them. It was not the Obama I knew while following the campaign in 2008 – not against Hillary Clinton and not against John McCain. He was not his own self. He looked tense and his answers were long-winded, losing his message.
Obama failed to deliver one-liners to capture his audience with memorable moments. Romney delivered a few wisecracks prompting even Obama to laugh, and the President was not effective at all. If anything, people will remember Romney a lot more than Obama.
Before the debate, I told my teaching colleagues Romney would move to the centre on important issues, otherwise he would go down to a landslide defeat, and he did as I predicted very effectively. He embraced populist programmes on entitlements (that worried swing voters) which is what I expected. We have a new what appears to be, moderate-type Romney instead of the right-winger who campaigned for the Republican nomination. I think he will move further to the centre in the remaining four weeks of the campaign and could pull off an upset.
Obama allowed Romney to move to the middle and redefine his position on issues and to paint Obama’s position as out of sync with the mainstream. He showed point by point how his policy is different from Obama’s and how it will turn around the economy and create jobs. Obama even failed to use his summary to spank Romney and to show how his plan for America is different from Romney’s and how Romney’s programme is not good for the economy. From the get go, Romney went on the offensive attacking the President, and he looked very convincing rattling off numbers showing he is very knowledgeable about economy issues. Romney had a firm grasp of the issues and what needed to be done to turn around the economy. Obama seems out of depth as pointed out. One can tell the President looked out of place like he did not want to be there, uninterested, dumbfounded and as though he was a lost soul. He was not happy at all and he did not even make an effort to defend his policies, especially Obamacare, when given the opportunities. It was his signature issue and he should have defended it. This was perhaps his worst public performance since seeking public office. Something went terribly wrong and he needs to recalibrate. He did not even hammer Romney on issues his advertisements attacked Romney on, like being concerned only about the rich. The President made errors that his advisors had hoped he would avoid.
Although Romney won handsomely, it was no game-changer for the outcome of the contest, although the narrative of the race will change. Romney will pick up a few points in the polls, get more funding which will allow him to remain competitive till the end, and now give him a shot of winning when two days ago he was cold out. Obama should still stay ahead or at worst be tied with the challenger in new polling, because committed voters’ minds have already been made up and not too many undecided voters are around. Romney may have changed the minds of some independents and seniors with his message that Obama is cutting Medicare while he wants to preserve funds for Medicare. Romney will not move much or significantly change the race unless he wins over Latinos and Asians (including Indians) in key swing states. He made one point that can appeal to Latinos – closer trade relations with Latin America, but he did not expand on it. He needs to delve deeper into that subject showing it will help both the US and Latin America to get more Latinos (26% not enough) to support him.
He also needs to talk about deepening trade and security relations with Asia, particularly the Philippines, India, Taiwan, and Vietnam – all of which have troubled relations with China and millions of whose nationals are settled in the US in battleground states. But at the same time, Romney cannot alienate China because millions of Chinese are also settled in the closely contested states, and he needs their votes. Romney must address the immigration questions. Asians and Latinos are concerned about their undocumented family members and family reunification with loved ones back home. If he can settle their minds on this issue, they will swing others to him. If Romey gets half of the Asian and Latino votes (70% favour Obama right now), then Romney wins comfortably in November. Otherwise, Romney will have a tough chance at defeating Obama even if he wins the other two debates.
Romney’s debate victory will dominate the news for the next several days and that will indeed change poll numbers. It will also encourage voters who had rejected Romney to take a second look at him.
Before the debate, I would have said the race was over as Obama was clobbering Romney in all of the swing states. With the debate, Romney showed it is still a contest. By beating Obama one on one, Romney convinces Republicans he still can pull off this thing and they will now pump money into the campaign to recapture the White House.
Youra faithfully,
Vishnu Bisram
